Over the last thirty years, short fiction has mysteriously fallen out of favor. The “glossies” like The New Yorker, Harper’s, Glamour, Seventeen and Esquire have cut back radically on the space they devote to them or ceased to publish them altogether. And forget about getting a publishing house or literary agent interested in a short story collection — you stand a better chance of peddling a pork roast to a rabbi for Passover dinner.
It’s enough to make O. Henry, Saki, Dorothy Parker, Edgar Allen Poe, Anton Chekhov, Raymond Carver, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, Flannery O’Connor, Somerset Maugham, Isaac Bashevis Singer, Leo Tolstoy, Mark Twain, Edith Wharton, Franz Kafka, Shirley Jackson, John Cheever and many, many others roll over in their graves. Though they didn’t get rich from it, back in the day these writers were decently recompensed for writing short fiction for magazines.
So who axed the genre? The readers — or the publishers? It would seem that in an era where everybody has too many things to do, no time to spare and a short attention span, short stories would be the ideal reading material: quick, easy, cheap — sort of like the literary equivalent of a perfect one-night stand.
And maybe that’s why short story writers receive little or no respect from publishing houses and agents. Random House and HarperCollins and the like can’t get $24.95-plus a pop for a 150-page short story collection, but they can from a 500-page novel, no matter how mediocre it is, and maybe a Hollywood movie deal to boot.
Writing a perfectly constructed short story is as challenging – or more so — than writing a full length work. In a novel, you have thousands and thousands of words to tell your story. The longer the work, the less brilliant the parts of it need to be. It can sprawl and meander and you can babble and ramble, but if you’ve got a hot enough plot going (as in Dan Brown’s incredibly poorly written The DaVinci Code) readers may overlook all the clunky digressions, excess verbiage, inaccuracies, improbabilities and loose ends. If every paragraph or chapter isn’t perfect, you can reasonably certain that nobody will notice, not even your editor.
In writing short fiction, it’s really not a matter of being concise — it’s about being precise. Every single word has to work or your whole illusional house of cards collapses — and the shorter the piece, the more this becomes vital. It’s a delicate balancing act. In a 5,000-7,000 word story, you’ve got some leeway — not much, but a little. But in a 500-2,000 word story, you better nail it or you’re dead.
Today, short story writers (unless they happen to be Joyce Carol Oates or John Updike) get paid little or nothing for their efforts in the few markets that remain, most of which are now online. The most I’ve ever been paid for a story was $50 and I was damn grateful. I guess that makes me and my other writerly friends literary sluts, but we do what we do for love of the art and the vague hope that maybe it will work out well for us, monetarily speaking, sometime in the future.
As short story writer par excellence Brett Lott so eloquently has stated in defense of the genre, “There is something about a short story…something beautiful and moving about holding in one’s hand a narrative, gem-like and perfect, that could be read in one sitting, opening its world before [our] very eyes and revealing its secrets in a small pocket of time that allowed [us] to go somewhere else and know something new.”
And that says it all. Thanks, Brett.
–phoebe kate